[Shotout]

Of course it will never work. Ideals rarely, if ever do exist when dealing with something as complex and the human psyche and add to that the interaction of all the people in proximity to one another and it becomes a real mess. As an ideal however, I should never impinge on another's right to pursue their dreams and goals, or even their stereo or personal space, just as they should never impinge on my pursuit or peace and quite reflection of a good book or purchased space of a seat as the example went. Driving down the road it is hard to remain a courteous driver, and that is a simple matter of manners and obeying rather simplistic laws. So while I appreciate the ideal, I still have to work on my own empathy in even the most basic interactions with others. Self awareness can be such a bother at times. :P
I had what I thought was a profound revelation when I was a freshman in college (1992). It was that our Western society was becoming more and more narcissistic with every passing year and that would lead to an eventual breakdown, or near breakdown of society as it existed at the time causing either a near anarchy state or a new renaissance of awareness in a rebound effect. I even wrote an essay on the subject for a class. The professor referred me to the library with a title and author for some reading. Seems I had the near exact same epiphany that some learned soul had published in 1972, two years before I was born! And there I was narcissistic enough to believe it was an original thought!

It'll never work!

Not when one doesn't practice what they preach. It is the two faced self centered "it's all about me" malfeasance that will mess it up with regularity. The imbalance tips with what others do that effects your life may be a problem for you. What we do that carelessly effects others is no longer viewed as our problem, it is someone else's with a tough luck attitude to boot!

We see it on a daily basis here and and every walk of life around the world. To the point, some find it convenient to recruit others to blow themselves up to remove groups that they determine create their life problems with abject ignorance to the problem they themselves create in turn.

What, you got a problem wit me? You don't achieve success by being Mr. nice guy to the unworthy under-educated working class.......Se La Vi, Que Sera, Sera, Allah Akbar, Kiss my fat white a, .......you know the drill!


DC

[One of Many]

Yessiry!

The crux is selfish Governments that breeds selfish cultures that breeds selfish individuals. Egocentrism becomes the unavoidable norm from the top down. Made more visible by a few that put their own self important causes above everyone else's.

DC

Of course it will never work. Ideals rarely, if ever do exist when dealing with something as complex and the human psyche and add to that the interaction of all the people in proximity to one another and it becomes a real mess. As an ideal however, I should never impinge on another's right to pursue their dreams and goals, or even their stereo or personal space, just as they should never impinge on my pursuit or peace and quite reflection of a good book or purchased space of a seat as the example went. Driving down the road it is hard to remain a courteous driver, and that is a simple matter of manners and obeying rather simplistic laws. So while I appreciate the ideal, I still have to work on my own empathy in even the most basic interactions with others. Self awareness can be such a bother at times. :P
I had what I thought was a profound revelation when I was a freshman in college (1992). It was that our Western society was becoming more and more narcissistic with every passing year and that would lead to an eventual breakdown, or near breakdown of society as it existed at the time causing either a near anarchy state or a new renaissance of awareness in a rebound effect. I even wrote an essay on the subject for a class. The professor referred me to the library with a title and author for some reading. Seems I had the near exact same epiphany that some learned soul had published in 1972, two years before I was born! And there I was narcissistic enough to believe it was an original thought!

[One of Many]

Getting back on track.......as it were?

Biofuel conflicts of interest?

Fuel over food

DC

[jhowelb]

Getting back on track.......as it were?

Biofuel conflicts of interest?

DC

Gotta be suspicious of anyone who tells me I gotta burn my lunch for energy to drive to the grocery store. Corn was made to eat. Can be converted to something to drink as well.

A fire is a fire,is a fire,is a fire,is a fire, and it will produce co2, co, no and God knows what else. Coal can be burned cleanly and if one is really concerned about the gasses released into the atmosphere, it can be pumped into layers of porous rock never to be sniffed again.

The real issue here is the people who want to impose this abomination upon us and the REAL reason behind it. This I approached obliquely with post #999 which went unnoticed or at least without comment.

Wake up, people! It's not the environment that is under assault here. It is YOUR FREEDOM! The elitists out there simply want to use this "Convenient Excuse" to put you in harness!

[martinw]

Wake up, people! It's not the environment that is under assault here. It is YOUR FREEDOM! The elitists out there simply want to use this "Convenient Excuse" to put you in harness!

Dear jhowelb,

The environment may (IMVVHO) be under threat. On the other hand, it may (IMVVHO) not be.

The "science" to support the first suggestion could well be seriously compomised by a toxic mixture of ....

(1) control freak politicians (as ever, with an eye on a larger tax-take, and yet more interference in the lives of the citizens),

(2) the IPCC, which only seems able to spout stuff the politicians want to hear, and ignores (or worse) , seems to use underhand smears to discredit those who publish papers that are not "on-side",

(3) possibly compromised scientists with empires to build, and funding to attract, and

(4) environmental pressure groups who would simply fade away if the truth proved inconvenient.

This has all been expressed more eloquently before on this thread, but I just feel like letting off steam. Sorry.

Best wishes,

Martin

[jhowelb]

The need for fuel and energy to sustain the kind of life style we have come to believe as necessary is impossible to meet with "bio-fuels". That is why we switched from wood, peat and animal dung.

The only power source to come close so far is nuclear, and it also has waste product problems

The alternatives to using what we have in abundance as cleanly as possible is mass suicide (the GW solution preferred by the likes of Wxyz) and a return to the stone age.

[Shotout]

Yessiry!

The crux is selfish Governments that breeds selfish cultures that breeds selfish individuals. Egocentrism becomes the unavoidable norm from the top down. Made more visible by a few that put their own self important causes above everyone else's.

DC

All govt are, by definition, selfish as they are only concerned with their own domain and citizens and only concerns itself with other entities when they interact with it. Egocentric is a normal state of a healthy mind, not a product of govt. Don't mistake egocentric with a lack of courtesy and manners. If you say we are losing some of the Vaseline of social intercourse thanks to our culture though, I would agree. Despite the finest honed sense of empathy the mind is only actually able to comprehend itself. We are incapable of knowing the mind of another, and can only "understand" another by interpreting their experiences in terms of ourself. We simply can not comprehend why another person could value an issue more than our most important issue. I myself get worked up more about animal rights vs welfare than GW. Other people think those are more trivial concerns than poverty, deforestation, or INSERT CAUSE HERE.

Ob on topic discussion.
I'm sure you all remember that GW proponents predicted more numerous and more intensive hurricane activity in the Gulf Of Mexico as a result of GW. Two quite years must have proved to be an embarrassment to the GW front. It seems that once again the scientific process takes another near mortal blow, now they say the last two quite years are a result of GW, a complete reversal by NOAA. They are simply changing their "facts" to suit their ends. Seems like if they can't figure out how water and air temperatures will effect storm formation in the tropical zone of the Atlantic then they certainly aren't qualified to make predictions for an entire global climate.

Just a thought
__________________________________________________ _____________
The nature of debate is to present one's own personal angular perspective to counter another's, not as an attack but as discourse.
Special Note
Discourse is not defined as calling someone a dick head

[One of Many]

Can you please explain specifically where and whom used the vulgar term you have below in your tag line?

To clarify my reponsibility in that exchange. Nobody called anyone a name. I was reasonably PC only agreeing with Geof's definition of his own actions in parts he admitted to bating people in another thread. My translation put emphasis on any characters childish head game responses and/or nitpicking non-technical posts for minor errors in technicalities that are not warranted nor that type of intrusion very welcome. Around here that is what it is, but let's at least maintian its context.........My concern was in my observations of how I see his character effects others without a care or a clue....if it were not intentional. Below he lays claim to it as if certain ones have it coming.....but somehow unaware that should include him quite often??

Quoting Geof:
Several months ago I posted in the thread "Why do you visit CNCzone", or some title like that. Included in my reasons was to puncture pompous prigs; and I think you will agree there are some. Another reason was to be a pompous prig myself to irritate people. Bit childish?


The spin was that I shouldn't read his posts if I am annoyed or become defensive, that is my problem? So, let me paraphase this in short. It's ok to act in an (insert vulgar explative) manner as you pass judgement on another ( insert vulgar explative) contributor because they abviously annoy him; therefore this (vulgar explative) needs puncturing to fit within a personified standard of the (vulgar explative) delivering it. Then become aghast, insensed and offended when reaction is turned back on him. It is this type of MO that then turns on a dime with not wanting anyone to effect his life small or large? I'd classify that as do as I say not as I do. I'm not sure it can be any more obvious.

When I put my self in that perdicament, then either I take the heat or know when to leave. I certainly don't think it needs more beating if it is already a dead horse..Moderators, please feel free to delete large portions of this thread! I doubt these last few weeks will be missed.

Egocentric is getting normal, but healthy?

3 a: limited in outlook or concern to one's own activities or needs b: self-centered; selfish.

In my use of the term, it is makes a direct link to a lack of courtesy and manners as detailed above.

You make a lot of good points SO!

DC

All govt are, by definition, selfish as they are only concerned with their own domain and citizens and only concerns itself with other entities when they interact with it. Egocentric is a normal state of a healthy mind, not a product of govt. Don't mistake egocentric with a lack of courtesy and manners. If you say we are losing some of the Vaseline of social intercourse thanks to our culture though, I would agree. Despite the finest honed sense of empathy the mind is only actually able to comprehend itself. We are incapable of knowing the mind of another, and can only "understand" another by interpreting their experiences in terms of ourself. We simply can not comprehend why another person could value an issue more than our most important issue. I myself get worked up more about animal rights vs welfare than GW. Other people think those are more trivial concerns than poverty, deforestation, or INSERT CAUSE HERE.

Ob on topic discussion.
I'm sure you all remember that GW proponents predicted more numerous and more intensive hurricane activity in the Gulf Of Mexico as a result of GW. Two quite years must have proved to be an embarrassment to the GW front. It seems that once again the scientific process takes another near mortal blow, now they say the last two quite years are a result of GW, a complete reversal by NOAA. They are simply changing their "facts" to suit their ends. Seems like if they can't figure out how water and air temperatures will effect storm formation in the tropical zone of the Atlantic then they certainly aren't qualified to make predictions for an entire global climate.

Just a thought
__________________________________________________ _____________
The nature of debate is to present one's own personal angular perspective to counter another's, not as an attack but as discourse.
Special Note
Discourse is not defined as calling someone a dick head

[Shotout]

One of Many
Perhaps our mileage just differs. I'm not out to offend anyone, you are of course included in that so I hope you don't take offense, even if you take umbrage be assured I'm not out to goad you. That really is all I have to say on it.

I say healthy as in the fact that a person who's mind isn't fundamentally self centered usually suffers from a personality disorder. I see a lot of narcissism and a disturbing lack of empathy as the cultural culprit IMO. I base this on talks with psychologist and psychiatrist friends of mine. One of these persons deals with a lot of court referrals through the juvenile justice system. Some of the cases he speaks about, always in general terms and with complete anonymity for the patient, are disturbing. He says he is seeing more and more kids with sociopath tendencies, compared he says, with symptoms of milder personality disorders in the past that feature narcissism but not to the extreme ranged of the former. Eddie Hasckell writ large. With all the polarizing issues in our lives these days it isn't surprising to me that people have a us vs them attitude. GW is an excellent example. Two contributors to this thread recently showed us just how a position can morph into a doctrine and cause strife. We are so busy arguing about the broad strokes we can't even find common ground.

I've seen the orbital photos that Nasa released showing arctic ice retreating since the days of Space Lab, they are dramatic. There is little doubt for me that climate changes is here. Even so it seems I can't find common ground with the followers of the GW bandwagon. They often simply refuse to discuss the possibility that man isn't the major; only factor. No one can intelligently argue that Earth hasn't been a much warmer and much colder place than it is now in the history of mankind, but suggest it is a natural cycle and you've committed blasphemy. Due to the warming in Siberia we have made finds that show that what is now permafrost use to be more temperate, with bodies of water that only froze over for the winter and supported large mammals like mammoths, you still will be insulted by many for suggesting that gw might simply be a natural cycle. Unless someone wants to prove mammoth flatulence keep it warmer then so that it was more temperate. To much division based on ideology for my taste.

[jhowelb]

There was a chemistry professor in a large college that had some exchange students in the class. One day while the class was in the lab, the prof noticed one young man, an exchange student, who kept rubbing his back and stretching as if his back hurt.

The professor asked the young man what was the matter. The student told him he had a bullet lodged in his back. He had been shot while fighting communists in his native country who were trying to overthrow his country's government and install a new communist regime.

In the midst of his story, he looked at the professor and asked a strange question. He asked: "Do you know how to catch wild pigs?" The professor thought it was a joke and asked for the punch line.

The young man said that it was no joke. "You catch wild pigs by finding a suitable place in the woods and putting corn on the ground.

The pigs find it and begin to come everyday to eat the free corn. When they are used to coming every day, you put a fence down one side of the place where they are used to coming. When they get used to the fence they begin to eat the corn again and you put up another side of the fence. They get used to that and start to eat again. You continue until you have all four sides of the fence up with a gate in the last side.. The pigs, which are used to the free corn, start to come through the gate to eat that free corn again. You then slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd. Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom. They run around and around inside the fence, but they are caught. Soon they go back to eating the free corn. They are so used to it that they have forgotten how to forage in the woods for themselves, so they accept their captivity."

The young man then told the professor that is exactly what he sees happening in America. The government keeps pushing us toward Communism/Socialism and keeps spreading the free corn out in the form of programs such as supplemental income, tax credit for unearned income, tax cuts, tax exemptions, tobacco subsidies, dairy subsidies, payments not to plant crops (CRP), welfare, medicine, drugs, etc.. While we continually lose our freedoms, just a little at a time.

One should always remember two truths: There is no such thing as a free lunch and you can never hire someone to provide a service for you cheaper than you can do it yourself.

[jhowelb]

Antarctic Seafloor Core Suggests Earth's Orbital Oscillations May Be
The Key To What Controlled Ice Ages

Here is the headline, below is the article. Will it play in Peoria?

[Geof]

......One should always remember two truths: There is no such thing as a free lunch and you can never hire someone to provide a service for you cheaper than you can do it yourself.

I can accept the first one but the second one is a stretch. Let us say I own a business or maybe I am a fat cat lawyer. What you are saying is that it is cheaper for me to sweep my own floors and wash out my own bath rooms than hiring someone? I might be charging $500 per hour for my lawyer services but I can hire someone for $10.00 or go with a contracting service for a bit more than that.

[One of Many]

One of Many
Perhaps our mileage just differs. I'm not out to offend anyone, you are of course included in that so I hope you don't take offense, even if you take umbrage be assured I'm not out to goad you. That really is all I have to say on it.

Mileage or comprehension of what transpired is there in black and blue. I realize in that regard where individual bystanders can experience the same instance and come away with a totally different perspective. Context can manipulate that conclusion unfairly. As I see it, my assessment combined with years of reading his other posts around the zone was verified accurate proven admittingly somewhat intentional to irritate. Making a habit of it, is acting above reproach. Putting up with it would IMHO be condoning it. My only resentment is that your statement was again being used in a misconstrued manner. No real offense taken, just setting the record straight.

[quote=Shotout;398996]I say healthy as in the fact that a person who's mind isn't fundamentally self centered usually suffers from a personality disorder. I see a lot of narcissism and a disturbing lack of empathy as the cultural culprit IMO. I base this on talks with psychologist and psychiatrist friends of mine. One of these persons deals with a lot of court referrals through the juvenile justice system. Some of the cases he speaks about, always in general terms and with complete anonymity for the patient, are disturbing. He says he is seeing more and more kids with sociopath tendencies, compared he says, with symptoms of milder personality disorders in the past that feature narcissism but not to the extreme ranged of the former. Eddie Haskell writ large. With all the polarizing issues in our lives these days it isn't surprising to me that people have a us vs them attitude. GW is an excellent example. Two contributors to this thread recently showed us just how a position can morph into a doctrine and cause strife. We are so busy arguing about the broad strokes we can't even find common ground.

I have always wondered if people that are self centered have a personality disorder! LOL!

My Wife's Uncle and his new wife are both Psychiatrists down in So. Cal. They have told me most of the PHD's in their profession have more mess up personal lives than the people that come to see them.

I'll agree that empathy is what grants us refrain from being self centered and selfish or using it against others intentionally. Putting people around us first, bodes well in friendship. We reap what we sow. Being around apathetic and indifferent characters oblivious in how ones behavior effect others is like the bad apple that spoils the bunch. It's contagious where in misery loves company.

When strife is the goal, reaction is the reward. Doctrine can become a weapon once you have chosen a side to defend. I know I was part of that and looking for a way to bow out without backing down. I began seeing my own involvement a ridiculous waste of energy against a character that I still believe does not truly exist for no other reason than a stain guard that can't be posted by its puppet master without respected member credibility damage. That just shows how far I have come to trust people in forums, let alone my personal life. You may be correct that narcissism is an excuse to point out differences. Which builds walls to mutual understanding, destroying a communication opportunity and desire to find common ground. Been there, done that and still fall into the same stupid trap.

I've seen the orbital photos that Nasa released showing arctic ice retreating since the days of Space Lab, they are dramatic. There is little doubt for me that climate changes is here. Even so it seems I can't find common ground with the followers of the GW bandwagon. They often simply refuse to discuss the possibility that man isn't the major; only factor. No one can intelligently argue that Earth hasn't been a much warmer and much colder place than it is now in the history of mankind, but suggest it is a natural cycle and you've committed blasphemy. Due to the warming in Siberia we have made finds that show that what is now permafrost use to be more temperate, with bodies of water that only froze over for the winter and supported large mammals like mammoths, you still will be insulted by many for suggesting that gw might simply be a natural cycle. Unless someone wants to prove mammoth flatulence keep it warmer then so that it was more temperate. To much division based on ideology for my taste.

Every time there is a vacuum created that sheds' light on questionable data, they cannot move fast enough to fill it again. Much of the statements made by top officials instruct the media fronts how to make it believable and fore warned not to offer facts that detract from the cause if they want their paychecks to continue. They know the laymen cannot discern all the data in a scientific view. So they offer to paint the image what they think it means as a plausible sell. It is no longer a question mark. It is head long into resolving a premonition.

DC

[jhowelb]

I can accept the first one but the second one is a stretch. Let us say I own a business or maybe I am a fat cat lawyer. What you are saying is that it is cheaper for me to sweep my own floors and wash out my own bath rooms than hiring someone? I might be charging $500 per hour for my lawyer services but I can hire someone for $10.00 or go with a contracting service for a bit more than that.

Regardless of what value you place on your own time you will expend less money doing it your self. Evasion of the main thrust of the statement is an invitation into a pissing contest and, I suspect, is exactly the sort of thing others here have taken issue with you about and haven't been able yet to make you see. Your ability to dismantle someone else's statement is not impressive nor is it conducive to civil conversation. Being critical for the sake of criticizing others is not an endearing quality.

There was a great deal more to the post than two simple points for you to agree or disagree with. The purpose of the post was to stimulate altruistic communication. That part you ripped up, threw away and diverted the conversation into trivia.

[One of Many]

I can accept the first one but the second one is a stretch. Let us say I own a business or maybe I am a fat cat lawyer. What you are saying is that it is cheaper for me to sweep my own floors and wash out my own bath rooms than hiring someone? I might be charging $500 per hour for my lawyer services but I can hire someone for $10.00 or go with a contracting service for a bit more than that.

By the number of post you have, we can tell you don't need to make a living when you have people to do that for you. Work smarter not harder?

A few years back when I was traveling in Field Service machine tool repair I needed to be down in Reno. A close friend who lives in the area invited me out for a night on the town suggests we go out to the Mustang Ranch to have a drink. Me and my bashfullness....not wanting any attention, a lady sat down at our table trying to get me to buy her a drink. She wouldn't take no as an answer and asked me how much money I would pay her for the night. I told her my wife only gave me 10 bucks for entertainment. Her undignified response was she wouldn't even take off her shoes for 10 bucks. I said, if I were that hard up, I'd take care of it myself and keep the 10 bucks with a lot less guilt! LOL! She did leave us alone after that! HA!

DC

[Geof]

By the number of post you have, we can tell you don't need to make a living when you have people to do that for you. Work smarter not harder? ....

That is the saying but I think success is more a case of work smarter and harder. And it is not true to say I don't need to make a living; my role when I started my company was to design our products, figure out how to make them figure out how to sell them and all the other stuff to run a business; the business was me! And I have pointed this out is some posts in threads where people are asking about starting a business and things like that; to be successful you need to learn to do almost everything for running a business; to be really successful you need to know when to step back and start delegating things to employees. My role now is to design new products and new production procedures; this is what I am very good at. My employees are very good at doing the day to day stuff to run the business which bores the life out of me; that is the real difference between an entrepeneurial business owner and someone who wants the security of working for a stable company. I have read articles about starting your own business which compare what is needed at different stages with explorers, or adventurers, and farmers. A start up needs the adventurer who takes the risk and who thrives on the stimulus of risk, and this is good for the early stages of a business. However, as the business develops, with luck, it becomes less risky and starts to need the farmer who does the reliable thing day to day to keep things growing. It is very difficult for an adventurer to transform to a farmer, sometimes impossible, and often you can trace the rise and fall of a company to the fact that the adventurer could never hand over control to the farmer. I have the farmers, some of them are family members, they are in many respects much more important to the company than I am because right now if I ceased to contribute the company would continue for a long time, maybe indefinitely; if they ceased to contribute the company would grind to a halt very quickly because I do not have the ability to do it all now.

And if anyone comments that this is way off topic they will be correct and IDNGAD.

[Geof]

....Being critical for the sake of criticizing others is not an endearing quality..That part you ripped up, threw away and diverted the conversation into trivia. ...

Okay; in other words if someone comes out with absolute drivel, like some currentyl absent posters have in this thread, if I point out that it is drivel and identify the flaws in their logic I am not being endearing.

My opinion, which is equally as valid as yours, is that your response to my post has diverted the conversation into trivia. Take what you wrote to its logical conclusion and you would have us all go back to subsistence agriculture, or even hunter gatherer status, talk about collective mass suicide!

[jhowelb]

Okay; in other words if someone comes out with absolute drivel, like some currentyl absent posters have in this thread, if I point out that it is drivel and identify the flaws in their logic I am not being endearing.

My opinion, which is equally as valid as yours, is that your response to my post has diverted the conversation into trivia. Take what you wrote to its logical conclusion and you would have us all go back to subsistence agriculture, or even hunter gatherer status, talk about collective mass suicide!

ONLY if you choose to look at the last two lines and obsess on them compulsively and refuse post after post to view the truth someone is trying to point out to you. At that point, conversation with you on any level becomes pointless.

I believe you are in fact a lawyer and your entire purpose is to confuse, compound and otherwise render incomprehensible any and all conversation thereby, in your own mind, making you appear to be the pinnacle of the intellectual pile.

It aint working!!

[Geof]

ONLY if you choose to look at the last two lines and obsess on them compulsively and refuse post after post to view the truth someone is trying to point out to you. ...

What truth are you trying to convince me of that I reject?

I did read the whole 'fenced in pig'; it is no different to the frog starting out in cold water on a stove and getting boiled alive. Both could even be true stories; I do not disagree with either of them as an apt analogy. I did post and pointed out the part that I did disagree with because it lacks commonsense.

[jhowelb]

What truth are you trying to convince me of that I reject?

I did read the whole 'fenced in pig'; it is no different to the frog starting out in cold water on a stove and getting boiled alive. Both could even be true stories; I do not disagree with either of them as an apt analogy. I did post and pointed out the part that I did disagree with because it lacks commonsense.

None is so blind as he who will not see!